6 + 2 Point Deductions

[pfim]

If the rule sucks - and everyone seems to agree it does - then now’s the time to challenge it. Forest, Leicester and Everton have all had to sell their best player to Spurs over the past 2 summers. We’re all saying who the rules are helping and it isn’t us

I’m not bitter, the decision makers at Everton were derelict in their duties. The punishments should have been known before the first club breached, it should have been clear, but someone at EFC should have seen this coming.

The time to challenge this was when Everton were deducted 10 points. There was some uproar but no one cared. Now that others are in the crosshairs it’s time to challenge?

The calculation is changing. The first decision has been appealed and the precedent set at 3 points plus. It’s too late now.

 

[ForeverEverton]

I’m not bitter, the decision makers at Everton were derelict in their duties. The punishments should have been known before the first club breached, it should have been clear, but someone at EFC should have seen this coming.

The time to challenge this was when Everton were deducted 10 points. There was some uproar but no one cared. Now that others are in the crosshairs it’s time to challenge?

The calculation is changing. The first decision has been appealed and the precedent set at 3 points plus. It’s too late now.

I`m not sure this is true, the "rule" was cobbled together and has so many holes they probably thought they could get off on a technicality, but then the Ind Regulator came over the hill and the PL needed to act hard.

In the PL rule book it mentions PSR but never mentions Sporting Advantage, this is made up by the IC`s probably at the PL request.

 

[GrandOldTeam]

Absolutely not!

Remember that each 'Independent Commission' is meant to be just that; and every time the EPL have made an announcement of a preferred or expected penalty they have been ignored, I.e the EPL wanted to give us a 12 point penalty and we got 10, and they wanted Forest to get an 8 point penalty and they got 4...

The Independent Appeals Board, might argue that the breach by Forest is actually severe and not just significant, and also revoke the -2 points for cooperation because Forest had the temerity to appeal what could be considered a lenient judgement in light of the final Everton judgement.

The mistake your making is trying to apply basic common sense or logic.

I look at it from the self interest view of the Premier League.

The independent panel are not independent.

If the appeal board put the 2 back on, it would make the process seem even more chaotic to the casual observer.

Then consider if Forest then went down by 2 points or less.

 

[richardo675]

If Forest got 2 points deduction due to owing up to it early and being forward in being helpful with the process and saving the commission time in their decision making, Is there a chance the new commission will add 2 points back as wasting the commission time if they come to conclusion of the original panel of 6 points but no mitigation factors as the appeal is wasting their time.

 

[jinkyali]

Why would be after the result of everton's case

Not if we appeal

 

[Fralahna]

wish we was a normal run club

But then 90% of the population on this thread will be loitering on some Eastenders forum. You have to admit, this is at least more entertaining.

 

[matty1878]

ha ha it’s getting lowered not increased

bottom 3 here we come

 

[matty1878]

But then 90% of the population on this thread will be loitering on some Eastenders forum. You have to admit, this is at least more entertaining.

oh my god

 

[Librarian]

The mistake your making is trying to apply basic common sense or logic.

I look at it from the self interest view of the Premier League.

The independent panel are not independent.

If the appeal board put the 2 back on, it would make the process seem even more chaotic to the casual observer.

Then consider if Forest then went down by 2 points or less.

Exactly, there is just no way

 

[Fralahna]

The sustainability element is easy. I dont understand why no one else has done it. All you have to do is already have loads of money (preferably oil money); have a network where another linked club isn't restricted on signings so you can then buy on the cheap; have a deal where you are always shown on telly; buy players on the cheap from other clubs who choose not to have oil money; already have a mega stadium; and lie about how sustainable your club actually is. Super easy.

 

[trevex]

The sustainability element is easy. I dont understand why no one else has done it. All you have to do is already have loads of money (preferably oil money); have a network where another linked club isn't restricted on signings so you can then buy on the cheap; have a deal where you are always shown on telly; buy players on the cheap from other clubs who choose not to have oil money; already have a mega stadium; and lie about how sustainable your club actually is. Super easy.

Yep but that's not cricket is it
Let's be honest as soon as the big 6 go away the better it will be whoever you class as the big six

 

[Librarian]

 

[HalfTimeSayers]

Do the PL have input into the appeal? I know they could have appealed themselves (and should have done as Forests punishment makes the whole process looked rigged which they clearly won’t like, and Forest ditched their cooperative approach which actually gave them the win and released an acerbic statement), but when it’s the club appealing, is there further arguments from the PL, or is it just club lawyer versus a new Commission, with PL excluded from the process?

Would seem Forests appeal would last 4 minutes if the PL just walked in there and pointed out they got away with half the recommended penalty and a 33% reduction on our punishment despite being a MUCH bigger breach and with total and complete intention to breach. If even after that going on record their penalty gets reduced further, I can’t see any way our punishment can possibly stand. No idea where our recourse comes from, but they simply cannot come out of this with half (or less) of our penalty following a bigger and more purposeful “crime”.

 

[pfim]

The mistake your making is trying to apply basic common sense or logic.

I look at it from the self interest view of the Premier League.

The independent panel are not independent.

If the appeal board put the 2 back on, it would make the process seem even more chaotic to the casual observer.

Then consider if Forest then went down by 2 points or less.

The independent panels are independent in the worst way possible: they’re independent of each other and there’s no consistency.

Otherwise agreed. The PL appoints the independent chair, by definition the independence stops there

 

[pfim]

Who told them? The appeals panel hasn’t even been assigned, it’s “independent,” how would anyone have any clue about the punishment?